Replacing the venerable MiG-21 Fishbed's

[Toptob]

Hey people,

I was reading an article on DID (Defense Industry Daily) about replacing the Roaf (Romanian AF) Mig 21 Lancer's Nothing But Netz: Romania’s New Fighters. And it seems to me that there will be a lot of airforces that will need to replace their mig21's in the near future (or have fishbed's that already require replacement)

So I like to start a discussion about the best Mig 21 replacements. In the case of the Roaf, it was reported on DID that they will probably will be buying some old block 25 F-16 C/D's. So here are the option's I see as good Mig 21 replacements:

1: My #1 option would be the Gripen. Because it's single engined like the Mig 21, and designed to be operated by drafted personel. Also the NG program could hold some exciting R&D offsets for some country's with a history in the aerospace industry (like romania and the Tsjech Rep.). This would seem the perfect solution for Eastern European country's (at least to me), it could also be a way to demonstrate their focus on Europe (icm. joining the EU etc.), but still stay neutral.

2: The F-16 has some things going for it namely: interoperability with NATO and Europe, demonstrating a Western political orientation, extensive weapons and systems integration a large userbase and its very very combat proven. Also there are a lot of peep's making stuff for the F-16 and a lot of country's are still developing their F-16's. But the best point I think is the availability of the thing, the US has large stocks of old F-16's they would love to earn some money off. But there are a lot more sources to get F-16's from, the Israeli's want to sell some old ones, and the Dutch are selling too. So all in all the F-16 has got a lot going for it.
There are some drawbacks tho: the fact that its American means they will want to have a say in how it's used . It also has ramifications for the foreing relations with non western nations (I would presume). It could also make existing weapon stocks obsolete (but so could the Gripen). But besides being cheap, it would mean operating a second hand aircraft with limited flying hours and refurbishment also brings costs with it.

3: Mig-29: The fulcrum was the logical succesor for the Russians, and a lot of other nations. Its capable and can use a lot of the weapons the Mig-21 uses. Its relatively cheap and was designed to do a similar job to the Mig-21.
But it has high operating costs, and the development base is by far not as active. The Russians can barely keep their own Fulcrums in the air, as discussed in this topic: http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/air-force-aviation/mig-29-still-grounded-8719/. And the Russians aren't planning to build a lot of new ones in the near future. All in all the Mig-29 is an exceptional airframe, but has some obvious flaws in range, interoperability, running costs and political connontation.

4: Mirage 2000: Awesome fighter, great munitions options, great performance. BUT! Closed production line, not much development in the future which would (logically) mean higher operating costs in the long run. Overall a superb choice for everyone, but more as an interim solution than a long term investment (Brasil made a nice deal for instance). A superb outside posibility would be buying the UAE's Mirage 2000-9's which they (reputedly) want to swap out for Rafale's. Those are some pretty nice birds with a lot of fight left in them.

5: FC-1/JF-17 thunder: Very nice very affordable very adaptable/ developable (is that even a word?:hitwall). But not combat proven, and its capability's in comparison are questionable. Also interoperability with western country's will probably be costly, and would mean a strange mingling of political blocs so you'll have to be very nice to both China, Pakistan and the West (if you put Western stuff in it).

Other options: The LCA? if they ever finish it. But for a lot of potential (western'ish) customers both the LCA and FC-1 (and the mirage) will be obsolete once they are totally integrated. Then there's the Korean T-50 but thats not a likely Mig 21 succesor imho.

A couple of closing remarks:

- I love the Mig-21, and I think the upgraded ones are awesome, I'd like to start a comparison thread for all the Mig-21 versions. (so thats still to come)

- I also want to make a Roaf thread, because it's a cool air force and I haven't yet found a thread on it. (then again I haven't found a search option on this forum ) so if one already exists point me that way .

I'm already exciting about reading responses so CHEERS!

 

[Kilo 2-3]

I like this thread idea. I can see it leading to an interesting discussion.

I think you've listed the options pretty comprehensively, although I'd like to make a few comments and additions on your current listing.

The oldest F-16s seem a bit iffy to me. There have been waves of groundings and/or concern over the oldest F-16A airframes might steer from nations (who are already dealing with aging MiG-21s). Although as you said, the F-16Cs from other nations and retiring/refitting ANG/US Air Force units are still options.

The Gripen's price tag will make it prohibitively expensive for some nations (cost has a whole host of issues tied to it, more cost=fewer airframes purchased, etc), although for those with the money, it does present a highly competitive option.

The Fulcrums are a mixed bag. There's plenty of parts and aircraft floating around at reasonable cost, but they don't have much room to grow and their capability is limited. Would buying the newer MiG-29Ks for land use be a viable and cost-effective option for some nations? It seems to me like this might be a way to get younger Fulcrums at a reasonable price.

And what about the J-7 (Chinese MiG-21 copy)? Yes, I know it's a bit odd to replace the MiG-21 with what's basically a MiG-21, but some of the J-7 airframes are fairly young (the last ones were built around 2008) and reasonably modern in their technology. There's quite a few of them in foreign air forces, and it's possible that a deal could be worked out with to buy some from China.

It'd also cut back on the need to acquire new spares, training, and weapons etc. But buying the J-7 would add barely any new capability to your air force and, it would still obligate your pilots to fly what is by all accounts a bit of a tricky bird to handle (note India's heavy MiG-21 losses in recent years, many due to trainees struggling to handle the MiG).

What about the Mirage F.1? It's a fairly new aircraft with a decent combat record. France has a few in mothballs and rumors are Spain might be looking to sell some of theirs. Some of the Mirages are long in the tooth, but the younger ones might be an option. There's also a recent precedent, after news that France was agreeing to refurbish 60+ Mirage F.1s for sale to the Iraqi air force.

 

[Feanor]

The MiG-29 will be in production for quite some time. Rather then opting for the MiG-29K the two best options would be to either wait a few of years and get the MiG-35, or get refurbished and overhauled MiG-29SMT from VVS stocks. Alternatively second-hands can be had from a lot of places around the world. The question being, will they be in good condition, and can modernization and spares be had?

 

[B3LA]

Regarding option 2 :

How are the availability on second hand F-16's with a reasonable
amount of fly-hours left in them on the open market?

I ask the question because Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, Denmark,
and Norway might hold on hard to their existing F-16 fleets or even
lease replacement F-16's to fill the gap before they receive their F-35s.

 

[Toptob]

Thx guys awesome reply's so far.

And what about the J-7 (Chinese MiG-21 copy)?

The J-7 is a substantially different aircraft, its a mix of defence cooperation and reverse engineering I believe. But with lots of different systems, so the commonality with the Mig-21 is not as high as it seems at first glance (Feanor or tpchuang will know much much more about this so correct me if I'm wrong). Also production and development have stopped for this airframe.

The mirage F-1 is a great aircraft, but mainly a bomber with limited AA capability's. Basicaly the reverse of some upgraded Mig-21's which are interceptors with a bomb strapped to the side. But the F-1 could also be a good option.

Mig-29-K is the carrier borne version, while a great option with two country's going for the type a very small number have been ordered so far. It might have a lot of options potential customers dont need (i.e. the carrier upgrades). The SMT seems like the most likely Fulcrum a Fishbed operator might go for (totally spaced on that tho ) but the Mig-35 is a totally different thing.
But it is being offered to India, and Russia intends to spend some of its sparce budget to make the thing a reality, so it is a real contender. I dont know what price they are being offered at, and what timescale there is for deliveries. How are Mig-35 prices compared to newbuilt Mig-29, newbuilt 29-SMT, overhauled Mig-29 and upgraded SMT ?

How are the availability on second hand F-16's with a reasonable
amount of fly-hours left in them on the open market?

I ask the question because Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, Denmark,
and Norway might hold on hard to their existing F-16 fleets or even
lease replacement F-16's to fill the gap before they receive their F-35s.

As far as availability goes, thats no problem. I know the Netherlands have a lot of F-16's in storage, and no plans to use them. The politics here are such that they cannot spend much more money on the F-16 if they want to get the F-35. I believe the Belgians also have F-16's in storage, In general, there are a lot of F-16's in storage world wide because of post cold war cutbacks, and aging airframes, take for instance the Israeli's who want to sell their old F-16A 'Netz' aircraft and the Americans also seem willing to part with some of their F-16's.

So the Netherlands at least has no problem with selling their F-16's, and I think most F-35 customers in Europe at least want to get rid of their F-16's at some time or another and for a lot of political parties that would be sooner rather than later.

 

[luccloud]

For countries who's part of Nato/EU like Romania, second hand F16 will probably be the best option. I am pretty sure they can arrange a great deal with other Nato countries for their current F16 once the F35 is delivered.

For others, JF17 is probably the best choice imo as they are really affordable and should be relatively ok performance. This is of course unless they want to go for something bigger like Su30 or F18. Another draw back is that JF17 still use Russian engine and until the Chinese replacement engine is ready, it's hard to guarantee engine parts supplies.

 

[Feanor]

Mig-29-K is the carrier borne version, while a great option with two country's going for the type a very small number have been ordered so far. It might have a lot of options potential customers dont need (i.e. the carrier upgrades). The SMT seems like the most likely Fulcrum a Fishbed operator might go for (totally spaced on that tho ) but the Mig-35 is a totally different thing.
But it is being offered to India, and Russia intends to spend some of its sparce budget to make the thing a reality, so it is a real contender. I dont know what price they are being offered at, and what timescale there is for deliveries. How are Mig-35 prices compared to newbuilt Mig-29, newbuilt 29-SMT, overhauled Mig-29 and upgraded SMT ?

MiG-35 is essentially an upgraded MiG-29K, minus the carrier capacity. The MiG-29K and MiG-35 are both derived from the MiG-29M2. They will have lower commonality with the older MiG-29S, MiG-29A, and MiG-29SMT.

Prices are up in the air. You can expect something similar to the Mig-29K, probably a little more expensive. Notably more expensive then rebuilt SMTs. There are no new built SMTs, as they're derived from the MiG-29S which hasn't been in production since iirc the early 90s.

 

[Marc 1]

For countries who's part of Nato/EU like Romania, second hand F16 will probably be the best option. I am pretty sure they can arrange a great deal with other Nato countries for their current F16 once the F35 is delivered.

One thing that may put a stick in the spokes of this option is that many nations who are looking to replace their F-16's with the F-35 would probably be in the same basket as Australia with our FA-18's - that being the existing airframes are shagged and right at the end of their service lives. It may be different for nations that mothballed large numbers of aircraft after the fall of the Berlin wall, but for those nations that didn't the delay in getting the JSF into service wouldn't be helping with the management of tired airframes.

 

[tphuang]

I think a lot of this is political. And with Romania looking to join the Western world and be protected by NATO, it seems unlikely that it will go for an Eastern option, which means F-16 or Gripen.

 

[B3LA]

....And the winner is :

Seems like Romania will opt for 24 used US F-16s.
A good budget choice!

Romania plans to acquire 24 used F-16 fighters - BusinessWeek

 

[Feanor]

The plan is as follows. 24 used now, 24 new later (block 52/60) and 24 F-35s in the long run to replace the used F-16s.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Its a step by step common sense approach.

Rather than getting a fantastic aircraft that can't be maximised for use due to training techniques, employment, maintenance etc, get a second hand one, practice on it until proficient then upgrade to a better aircraft.

Noted that romanians have been using Mig-21s as their primary combat fighter. Its already a big step up to the F-16 and will be a bigger step up to the F-35. Good idea and cost effective to phase in.

If pilots get proficient earlier, replace aircraft earlier. If later or if there are problems with cost/timing for the F-35, then the options later are far better as the pilots/maintenance crews are then more proficient.

 

[swerve]

I think a lot of this is political. And with Romania looking to join the Western world and be protected by NATO, it seems unlikely that it will go for an Eastern option, which means F-16 or Gripen.

A bit more than 'looking to join', I'd say. Romania is a member of both NATO & the EU.

 

[B3LA]

On paper, yes, but it will still take them quite some time before they have the
same mentality and standard of living as the rest of the western world after so
many years under Commie oppression.

I guess they don't really have to upgrade their F-16s right away either...
Just make them airworthy on a shoestring as a start.
Then take small steps as the state budget allows. Brilliant.
I wish I could receive a free F-16 too ;-)

 

[swerve]

On paper, yes, but it will still take them quite some time before they have the
same mentality and standard of living as the rest of the western world after so
many years under Commie oppression.

45 years of Communism in Romania. 20 years since it was overthrown. Think about what those 20 years mean. Communism is history to a large proportion of the population now.

 

[B3LA]

Look at East and West Germany...20 years of a united Germany
and there are still significant differences there :
Unemployment rates, state of minds, standards of living.

Romania unfortunately started from a much worse position.
These things take longer time than we think.

But we are Off Topic now...

 

[Ananda]

Guys, whoever need Mig 21 replacements (except for India) can't be catagorize strong economically. Thus Gripen means for most of the countries that want to replace Mig 21 is beyond the reach to be significant replacements in number.
You can go for used F 16, but for new airframes, FC-1 is the only ready airframe available (in which still economically reacheable for one on one or one on two replacements).
China repleces her J 7 with J 10. However the prices of J 10 also can't be said economically viable for most Mig 21 users (for significant replacements scheme).

While India LCA ?? This supposedly Mig 21 replacements right ?? however do anybody knows whether India herself will finally bought significant numbers of them for sure ??
Do anybody knows what the price comparison for final LCA version and FC-1 ?

 

[Toptob]

Okay maybe we're drifting off a bit, but I'll go for it.

First, the Eastern European country's are very very very different from Western European ones. There where stringent demands put on them to reform before they could join the EU. But some years after many of the old practices of corruption and government repression. I dont want to insult Eastern Europeans, but to those Europeans; take a good look at your governments.

45 years of Communism in Romania. 20 years since it was overthrown. Think about what those 20 years mean. Communism is history to a large proportion of the population now.
2 Hours Ago 02:44 PM

Again I'm a Western European, but I know Easterners living here and there are a lot (and I mean A LOT) of documentary's about the governance practises. And from all this information I gather that Communism is far from gone. The people yearn for the stability it brought and the politicians yearn for the corruption they could get away with.

Second: We can classify Fishbed replacers in several different groups. There are the Eastern Europeans, the North africans, South East Asians, central Asians and Africans. Now there are regions where no country's operate the Mig-21, I'm thinking about South America where a lot of operators have old and obsolete materiel and can only dream of operating a Lancer, or a Bison. Therefore They are classified by me.

Now who wil likely buy what?

I think its best for the Europeans to go for gripen. They will get a new airframe with active development and it shows a commitment to the European Union rather than to NATO. To me the purchase of either the F-16 or Gripen will send strong messages to NATO or the EU respectively, it will be up to them which relations are most prominent for them. I dont see other options for these country's.

For the Africans, things can go all ways, and I do agree the the FC-1 would be the best option. It's cheap capable and available. Political alignment aside, I see the North Africans going for a more expensive route with Egypt and Morocco opting for the F-16 (But also FC-1's for Egypt).

The asians have to make hard choices. They have to protect their territory and relations with neighboring country's aren't always that good. So they will have to look for the best capability's for a price they can afford in order to get the numbers up. Now if thats politically possible remains another topic and we have seen country's making purchases that dont seem to smart for instance Malaysia and Indonesia who operate diverse and expensive fleets that dont give them good numbers if we look at availability and servicability. I dont know what they should choose, but its definitly not the big whopper (Su27 derivatives).

As for the South Americans. Well Chile bought old dutch F-16's, and those are nice airframes. In the region those F-16's are pretty nice and should keep them up to date with the competition for quite some years. But there are a lot of country's operating Mirage III's and V's and their derivatives, and frankly those dont impress me in the scheme of things, and would in a perfect world have been replaced some years ago. What should they go for? I think either the F-16 if they're pro American or FC-1's if they're not.

I dont know if I've covered all the bases here but I'm sure you guys will tell me

(Edit)

About the LCA, I'm not impressed by that. And I'm not a FC-1 fanboy, but the thing is drastically behind schedule, they dont have the indiginous engine they want and when it becomes available for active service (god knows when that will be) the production lines will be swamped with Indian orders. Also the LCA isn't very sophisticated (neither is the FC-1 for that matter) in comparison with some other options, and to replace the Mig-21 with the LCA wont be a big step up, especially when you realise that it will be quite some years before you recieve them.

 

[Feanor]

If you guys want to discuss the East-West divide in Europe please use the Off-Topic forum. It's a fascinating discussion, and I definetly have my own 2 cents to add, but don't derail this thread.

 

[shag]

About the LCA, I'm not impressed by that. And I'm not a FC-1 fanboy, but the thing is drastically behind schedule, they dont have the indiginous engine they want and when it becomes available for active service (god knows when that will be) the production lines will be swamped with Indian orders. Also the LCA isn't very sophisticated (neither is the FC-1 for that matter) in comparison with some other options, and to replace the Mig-21 with the LCA wont be a big step up, especially when you realise that it will be quite some years before you recieve them.

I don't understand why people keep harping on the fact that LCA doesn't have its own engine yet. Other than the xp options like rafael and typhoon or russian planes neither the Gripen nor FC-1 have their own indegenous engines. This is not such a big drawback as it seems, well it is a drawback . but if you compare it with FC-1or gripen its not a point for the other planes since neither planes have a indegenous engine.

I wouldn't comment on the not sophisticated comment since a generic comment saying some plane is not good enough, not sophisticated turns out into a pointless discussion. But I guess you can explain that further if you want.